User talk:Pandelver

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is Pandelver's Discussion/User_talk page for communications regarding all wikis.

This user's pages at the following wikis ask that you only communicate with this user here on this Discussion/User_talk page at the English language Wikipedia, preferably using the English language in any dialect, though this user will use partial knowledge and online translators, if available, to read messages in other languages:


Purple.

Blue[edit]

Thank you for the wonderful additions. Ebikeguy (talk) 02:06, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My appreciation for help and guidance from veteran fellow Wikipedians[edit]

Pandelver to PhGustaf:

Thank you!

Best wishes and happy editing, PhGustaf (talk) 01:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for being inattentive...I can't help...with translations. Goo luck. PhGustaf (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PhGustaf, I didn't think a day or two to reply was inattentive at all; we're not 24 hours Wikipedians. Thank you for helping in all the ways you can. And if you hear of who among programmers of Wikipedia or those brainstorming future policy for greater multilinguality in harnessing resources, especially those already within the Wikipediac fold such as in Wikimedia, are working, do keep me in mind to let me know! And best of luck in all your endeavors, here and elsewhere.

Warmest regards PhGustaf, Pandelver (talk) 04:55, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pandelver to SineBot:

How wonderful! SineBot, are you a fully automated identity, a Wikipedia electronic-only program? Please tell, out of your own consciousness (not because anyone makes you do so!).

Pandelver to WoodyWerm:
Thank you, Woody(?), I have also given you thanks on your own talk page, appreciate your attentive response
Pandelver to RHaworth:
Thank you also, RHaworth! :)

The Signpost: 22 March 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 11 April 2011[edit]

The Signpost: 02 January 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 02 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 09 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 16 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 23 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 30 April 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 07 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 14 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 21 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 28 May 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 04 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 11 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 18 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 25 June 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 02 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 09 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 16 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 23 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 30 July 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 06 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 13 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 20 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 27 August 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 03 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 10 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 17 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 24 September 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 01 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 08 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 15 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 22 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 29 October 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 05 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 12 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 19 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 26 November 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 03 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 10 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 17 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 24 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 31 December 2012[edit]

The Signpost: 07 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 14 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 21 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 28 January 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 04 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 February 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 February 2013[edit]

WikiCup 2013 February newsletter[edit]

Round 1 is now over. The top 64 scorers have progressed to round 2, where they have been randomly split into eight pools of eight. At the end of April, the top two from each pool, as well as the 16 highest scorers from those remaining, will progress to round 3. Commiserations to those eliminated; if you're interested in still being involved in the WikiCup, able and willing reviewers will always be needed, and if you're interested in getting involved with other collaborative projects, take a look at the WikiWomen's Month discussed below.

Round 1 saw 21 competitors with over 100 points, which is fantastic; that suggests that this year's competition is going to be highly competative. Our lower scores indicate this, too: A score of 19 was required to reach round 2, which was significantly higher than the 11 points required in 2012 and 8 points required in 2011. The score needed to reach round 3 will be higher, and may depend on pool groupings. In 2011, 41 points secured a round 3 place, while in 2012, 65 was needed. Our top three scorers in round 1 were:

  1. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), primarily for an array of warship GAs.
  2. London Miyagawa (submissions), primarily for an array of did you knows and good articles, some of which were awarded bonus points.
  3. New South Wales Casliber (submissions), due in no small part to Canis Minor, a featured article awarded a total of 340 points. A joint submission with Alaska Keilana (submissions), this is the highest scoring single article yet submitted in this year's competition.

Other contributors of note include:

Featured topics have still played no part in this year's competition, but once again, a curious contribution has been offered by British Empire The C of E (submissions): did you know that there is a Shit Brook in Shropshire? With April Fools' Day during the next round, there will probably be a good chance of more unusual articles...

March sees the WikiWomen's History Month, a series of collaborative efforts to aid the women's history WikiProject to coincide with Women's History Month and International Women's Day. A number of WikiCup participants have already started to take part. The project has a to-do list of articles needing work on the topic of women's history. Those interested in helping out with the project can find articles in need of attention there, or, alternatively, add articles to the list. Those interested in collaborating on articles on women's history are also welcome to use the WikiCup talk page to find others willing to lend a helping hand. Another collaboration currently running is an an effort from WikiCup participants to coordinate a number of Easter-themed did you know articles. Contributions are welcome!

A few final administrative issues. From now on, submission pages will need only a link to the article and a link to the nomination page, or, in the case of good article reviews, a link to the review only. See your submissions' page for details. This will hopefully make updating submission pages a little less tedious. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 01:06, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 March 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 01 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 08 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 15 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 22 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 29 April 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 06 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 13 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 20 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 27 May 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 05 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 12 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 19 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 26 June 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 03 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 10 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 17 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 24 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 31 July 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 07 August 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 14 August 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 21 August 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 28 August 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 04 September 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 September 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 September 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 September 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 02 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 09 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 16 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 23 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 30 October 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 06 November 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 13 November 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 20 November 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 20 November 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 04 December 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 11 December 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 18 December 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 25 December 2013[edit]

The Signpost: 01 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 08 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 15 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 22 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 29 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 29 January 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 12 February 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 19 February 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 26 February 2014[edit]

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 12 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 19 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 26 March 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 02 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 09 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 23 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 30 April 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 07 May 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 14 May 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 21 May 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 28 May 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 04 June 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 11 June 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 18 June 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 25 June 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 02 July 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 09 July 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 16 July 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 23 July 2014[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for August 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chasing the dragon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this link was intended. Thank you, too. Disambiguation pages often include substantive Wikipedia encyclopedic information as well as mere link lists, especially in their first paragraphs and any summary descriptions provided for items in their lists. Pandelver (talk) 17:18, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dingoes[edit]

While experts seem to agree that Australian dingoes and NGSDs are wild true dogs, can we be so confident about all Canis lupus dingo? The Thai dog seems to be just an ordinary street dog, even though experts class them as C.l. dingo based on their skull shapes and so on. Chrisrus (talk) 14:32, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, we are surely in agreement here, Chrisrus:

You point out a Venn diagram kind of subsets untidiness as well as, shifting those subsets, potential overlap (with changing domicile venue) over time messiness. In this case, (C l. dingo set) contains those which are (true wild dog subsets) and may also contain (Thai dingo/dog as another subset which may not (some or all) be simultaneously a member of the (true wild dog subset)) though its members may originate with members of (true wild dog subset within C. l. dingo set) or its members may move, through feral to long-term 'naturalized wildering ->attributed nativity' wildness as a matter of either human popular, conventional, or strict evolutionary parsing by geoduration, behavioral, epignetic, physio-anatomical distinctiveness. . . you join a human domicile quickly, but when are you or your descendants wild again if you leave one, eh? I suspect what you point out does get ambiguously used in what this article has been calling 'expert' reference: C. l. d. is recognized in comparison with f. as 'true' 'wild', but yes a few have become home friends, comensals, adopted family or captives or bred by humans, and in a moment's context we may wish to know whether we are saying they are part of the subspecies which is 'wild' in general tax or are leaving or have left that subset, or rather, which meaning is being used by the subset name.

If you'd like to add something about the situation of the historical or present Thai population in this regard, mention them and any other varieties you consider borderline or ambiguous cases and qualify the TWD set in relation to the C. l. d. set and subsets in this article, please go right ahead.

And since, of the 3 dogs currently listed in the Thai Dog disambiguation page, only the dingo does not have its own page, while the other two are at the same tax level, did you want to be the one to create and fill that out better, including more of the relevant attributes and history surrounding what you point out, so it does not only continue as a subheading under other articles, its largest text (and are there photos anywhere yet?) being under the C. l. d. article, Chrisrus? Pandelver (talk) 06:33, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let's just get this straight. I understand that while the term "wild dog" has many referents, in expert usage, the only ones that they use the term for which is actually a true dog happen to all be C.l.dingo, but that not all of them are wild.
According to http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/4106MK0C87L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg, C.l.dingo is a product of the prehistoric Austronesian diaspora. Austronesian people such as Indonesians and Philipinos and such must have originated on or near the continent and then spread out to different Islands, taking their dogs with them, where they still are to this day. Those that stayed in Thailand are still normal dogs, and that's apparently why there is little scientific interest in them. Those on other islands went other directions, and those on New Guinea and Australia eventually went wild but not until long after the whole process started. So they are default domesticated animals, albeit quite primitive and not very domesticated as Pekingese for example or modern breeds, but that to equate all c.l. dingo with wildness is very common idea but not right.
It wasn't until Corbett went to Thailand and did his study of hundreds of specimins (by the way he got them from the butcher) that he finally published that they were closely related to the only very famous C.l.dingo, the Australian dingo, and that that must have been their place of origin or close to it. But this is not to say that he was trying to say anything about the Thai native dog in terms of it's wildness. It was all based on skull shapes and bones and estrus cycle and such. Thai dogs are the same comensal village dogs or street dogs that you see elsewhere, not found fending for themselves indepentant of people like Aus Dingoes or NGSDs.
You're right, however, that this does tend to make a mess of things. For his purposes, Corbett doesn't use "lupus", he calls them Canis dingo and has his own different subspecies names that he uses. He can tell a coastal Aus dingo from a desert one from a skull fragment at a glance. Seen from his perspective, this makes sense for cataloging specimins. He's the one who employed by the government to figure out the net effect of the predator on different livestock populations in his native Australia, whether the rabbits they kill make up for the calves they take, and so on, so everything with him stems from that POV. This explains why of all the old dog subspecies taxa that they used to use, one for bulldogs, one for poodles, one for sheepdogs, one or hounds, and so on, dingo is the only one still in use. But meanwhile the rest of the world dropped all that when they unadvisedly made the domestic dog a subspecies of wolf. Now there's no room to maneuver.
There's no substitute for taxonomy, but to me, it's not real, just a necessary contrivance, no realer than the Dewey decimal system. Not everything fits nicely and there are always gray areas. What's real to me are the smooth branches of clades, and the actual history of how all creatures got to be what they are. But Wikipedia articles have clear lines between them, just like the labels and specimen jars and boxes and drawers and their labels that taxonimists have to have. So we have to make it work but not to force it and admit when it doesn't make much sense as it is bound to do at times. Chrisrus (talk) 06:19, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed. Austro-Asian-etal humans "taking their dogs with them" continues AFAIK to be the general assumption, and usually made because of swimming distances imagined as an alternative. Away from Corbett, there's mtDNA and related digging just begun really, not only in the species but regarding plate tectonic timings, so perhaps for a few years we shouldn't expect much more pith to be revealed yet out of what can eventually be sleuthed after-the-fact where canid migrations antedating these human groups is still in the pot being kept open as earlier radiation of both dingo and familiaris have been asserted in recent years. So as for 'getting this straight', in our conversation together we prolly already were fairly so. What would you like to do as editor, then? And hope you received my friendly heads up and inquiry on your page? Pandelver (talk) 06:33, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

btw, when you tell the story of stay-at-home Thai dogs being the untraveled, unchanged-by-new-circumstances-pressure-on-evolution pre-dingoes, you are prolly suggesting the reverse to the path you ascribe to Corbett as assuming 'famous dingo is in AU' so 'Thai must have come from near THERE' - you are suggesting that dingoness might first be evolved in the stay-at-home mainland/coastal/near island landraces which the farther dingoes then resemble as descendants, and maybe with the features we have come to consider dingo emphasized in their modifications! Pandelver (talk) 06:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

and oh, sharing your amusement about what Thai animal vendor handled Corbett's first examined specimens, did Corbett say they were tasty, or recommend recipes among the local repertoire? Pandelver (talk) 06:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC) NGSDs may have sampled good recipes for cooked or prepared human, courtesy of human tribes,as they aren't known for eating any raw, I'm also curious, even if it's less likely, if through his examination of digestion and by other means, if Corbett found good recipes for humans among Thai dingoes!. Pandelver (talk) 02:59, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisRus, thank you for thanking me for adding the Rabbit clan to that list of animals on your Talk page! Pandelver (talk) 04:56, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, on your User page. Pandelver (talk) 04:57, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Asmat Museum of Culture and Progress, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages St. Thomas University, Elmdale and St. Cloud. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, DPLbot, my my your report is partly wrong, you have a bug which causes you to say that links to 1 of these 3 DA pages were added, because 2 were indeed added as well as another one but not a link to St. Cloud, but you are self-aware that you may be buggy and say so, which is very nice of you. You have substituted the phrase 'St. Cloud' for 'St. Paul' in speaking to me, and 'St. Paul' does not lead to a DA page. Fortunately, these 3 were properly intended, and the other 1 you imagine doesn't exist. You are already free to create such links yourself! You do me and all of us the service of pointing out where a name or geo reference only leads to a DA page, and I have acted upon that to sharpen 2 of these links to specific articles which I then found listed on those DA pages. We shall leave 1 DA link as is, since the institution we are mentioning is listed on that DA page but does not have its own page yet, so the DA page is the best home to visit for tea at W at present. May I make you a cup, would you like that?

It's OK to leave me messages in your confusion in the sense that I am commpassionate about your psychosis, "it's nothing, just little stuff." Grow and be incredible in many wonderful ways, bot! Pandelver (talk) 17:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anaphora (linguistics), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Media. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nordic Genetic Resource Center, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Nordic, AEGIS and Ås. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Pandelver. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Nordgen-2logos.png[edit]

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nordgen-2logos.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eight-Nation Alliance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dagu. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, DPL bot, my links to DA pages are typically quite conscious and contextually intentional in explication. Pandelver (talk) 21:42, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to Tara[edit]

You cannot cite to Wikipedia, Wiktionary, or blogs. Your addition has been removed. Try again with real sources. Skyerise (talk) 13:54, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I shall leave retrying to others at present, you are welcome to take it up if you like. Pandelver (talk) 14:06, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What may matter is our consorted efforts in delivering veracious content :) Pandelver (talk) 14:07, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All the finest to you this season and beyond! Pandelver (talk) 14:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I trust, of course, that you have only so far scrupulously reverted the line-items which fail your citation standards. Thank you for your own contributions and for welcoming comprehensive growth of new content with me together! Pandelver (talk) 14:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to meet you. Not sure the couple sentences properly cited will stand by themselves, but I'll look into it... Happy holidays!Skyerise (talk) 16:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I imagine now, stimmed by you Skyerise, that interarticle citation porting. . . what's the history of programming dabs at it over Wikipedia history? Especially as many of our better editors, even valuing W, are the busy ones time constrained in the rest of the world. Pandelver (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cognizant of content changes needed in the facility, such as commonly 1+Nth variants of a source don't have the initial head. Pandelver (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to etymology sections on Buddhist articles, you should observe caution and use real sources, preferably books and journals. Just so you know, many of the previous etymology sections (some but not all of them now removed) were written by a now-banned user, using flimsy sources and doing what amounted to original research, very much like you are doing. That editor is no longer welcome here. Best not make yourself similarly unwelcome by looking like a duck. Using proper sourcing and avoiding synthesis would definitely make you look less like a duck. Skyerise (talk) 17:59, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's good to know. But since knowledge and its use drives what we do, rather than writers's interests and desires, first, what is your encyclopedic feeling, Skyerise, for whether Buddhist articles, and to start with this one, should have or would benefit, including your content take, beyond procedural, about its worth for the range of readers of this content? Pandelver (talk) 23:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And do you think etymologies should evolve into any other particular directions in this portal area, are there valuable uses which are not yet being served, are their variations in the nature of the etymologies to be delivered, or what else do you see from your experience, your imagination, and your design of this area's future utility? Pandelver (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an editor. I'm not interested in such hypothetical discussions. Don't use Wiki or other user-contributed sites as sources, or blogs - if it's got a place to make comments, it's pretty much out. Pay attention to the citation style. The article you are editing lists sources at the end and then cites to them using {{sfn}} tags. Your additions to the article should maintain that style. If your source doesn't have an author, then — well, that's probably a source you shouldn't be using... So carry on... Skyerise (talk) 15:36, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution[edit]

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Kali (asura) into Halahala. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 15:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa, gladly done, thank you very much, checked as your arm swept me graciously and found you had added in the edit summary. Added further notes in subsequent edit summary on modifications during import and subsequent fittings to surrounding paras, and a See also to Kali (asura). And an edit summary for the Kali (asura) folks. Thank you! Pandelver (talk) 15:38, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In my own fingers' case, documenting in the sense of claiming any credit or virtue for what I've done amongst everyone else, as you may sense, isn't germane, the courtesy to those and to the topics themselves, though I'm not much with Plato there, elsewhere, is a value I very much endorse, as my first realization on your own talk page abets. Pandelver (talk) 15:50, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Outside of the institutional W why and then this second reason borne among the humans making these patties, what's your own take not only on the ethics, but on the literary practice and then on how that plays with readers' uses, Diannaa? (I'm reminded by the principles of software programming there's also a housekeeping element, about how well what's cited and updated or discarded over time in one source article isn't live tracked to its descendants. . . AND their changes and selectivities.) On that mechanical point, I expect when we finally implement AI within W to track not only changes but even parallel and convergent evolution of articles' content, not just mechanically, but with nuance, understanding and finesse, much more will be possible, just as linkage will become a different order of animal. So what do you see and want to bring to bear as we go? Pandelver (talk) 15:56, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What psychobabble! Please put down the ayahuasca! Skyerise (talk) 15:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From HistoryOfIran talk page: Just a note that since software function in its work (translation here) is governed by ownership or licensing, so in the OP's case of Google translate, Google as operative owner of Google translate will technically have a layer of copyright in its output (the translations) too; if you translate on a different site than mega Metro (Google), the programmers and the site owner and owner's rights may be different too, so who has the layer or if it is multiple layers of copyright may not be immediately obvious. All this while we have not yet technologically progressed to where the recipient (even behind the eyes of a photonic viewer of a text, be that you or a camera or scanner) will later be acknowledged as capturing a derivative version, not a pure copy of what was perceived (think how musical notes get played and then heard differently). . . but that higher detail and its scrutiny only arrive tomorrow, likely in many of our lifetimes. Wikimedia already deals with photos of paintings, but with word translations which are always choices of synonyms and different connotations, not just denotations, in contexts, what is understood as a meaning from one layer to the next, and also gets transmitted, shared, reinterpreted in conveyance to others, in future even more without change in media than passing a printout or a site page today, are going to be a more detailed question. Bear in mind, copyright is a relatively modern invention, and infamously China's modernization leaped from ignoring it as an issue bothering them from nations where it had status, while convenient for China, to its desire to now be a leader, not just an equal, in global principles so just as with environmental policy for our common future, and because copyright is wished for its own entities viz a viz the rest of the world, China's tune has drastically changed. In the old days which yesterday China used as its ethics, even having a long printing history, repetition of another author was a compliment. Around the world, before the idea of copyright, creators amd inventors who did not automatically reap rewards, or potential title to them, through copyright, was revered because what they did benefited everyone. Potentially right away. So human use of this concept evolves, and in the early 21st century we are merely at a midpoint it its development. Pandelver (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From Diannaa talk page: Hello Diannaa. Hope you're doing well. I'm having a bit of a brain fart over here. Say I translated a French Wikipedia article into its English version. That wouldn't be considered a violation of copyright, since the words in that French article is already rewritten? In other words, if I add that translation template thingy on the talk page of the article I put the translated stuff in, I should be good, right? HistoryofIran (talk) 23:48, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The template is great. But you also need to provide attribution in an edit summary. i.e. "Attribution: text was copied/translated from fr:Crêpe on December 30, 2022. Please see the history of that page for full attribution." — Diannaa (talk) 00:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Forgot to say: It's not a copyright violation to copy/translate articles from other-language Wikipedias. Just do the attribution things, — Diannaa (talk) 00:03, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thank you very much! --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Acually, the international law regarding translations and the associated ethics currently exists with some layers of contradictory principles. For example: Canada reserves translation authorization to the orginal text creator (before we get to approval of translation elements): as in https://www.bereskinparr.com/doc/don-t-get-lost-in-translation-copyright-protection-in-translated-works, while "internationally binding regulations (e.g. the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic works), translations, among other alternations, are protected as original works without prejudice to the copyright in the original work." as in https://www.lr-coordination.eu/node/251, showing these URLs in line here as part of describing the state of things, from a major law firm with an intellectual practice to an international communications agency. If Diannaa writes a phrase and permits you to translate it, HistoryofIran, with an a priori consented carte blanche, and you then create a translation for which from most governing jurisdictions on various sides you then hold the copyright, but then Diannaa objects to your particular translation or how you and others use it, some would say Diannaa lost her right to further edit what you produce by the nature of her prior permission; others may say, even legally, that you may have breached her trust in you in the principles with which she granted you a scope of permission. And she may not be concerned until we all see how a third party reacts to the translation you have created, and what use that party makes of your work and of hers which have become somewhat different entity matters by then. So this is both the formal international and national context, and the 'real effect' among intelligent actors involved from which you will choose your practical ethics. As Diannaa recommends in the particular case of W here, attribution is always polite and tends towards propriety in valuing others who are our sources, collaborators, and yes, even those whose translations, because such are always linguistically interpretations, vary from ours, whether guessing a cuneiform semiotic or a Farsi semantic.
As I am not a Farsi speaker, while admiring much Iranian culture, should I end with "عرض کردن"? Pandelver (talk) 17:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, in your example, HistoryOfIran, there are at least 3 layers of copyright, each has its own, so the French W is copyright 2 and your English W is copyright 3; and the tendency over recent centuries is to acknowledge plagiarism across single language (and its dialects and hybrids) into multilanguage re-presentations (viz translations besides changes in media). Each reworking pulls along roots from the previous and also sprouts its own new intellectual property layer with any rights, courtesies and new meanings and significations to others and thus potentially new identities beyond those for which rights and courtesies and implications existed before :) Pandelver (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of what you are saying is not applicable to copying within Wikipedia, which is covered by Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. And it's not helpful advice for any copyright situation regardless, as it is not written very clearly or understandably, so sorry. — Diannaa (talk) 21:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Pandelver![edit]

Happy New Year!

Pandelver,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 18:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 18:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red[edit]

Hi there, Pandelver, and welcome to Women in Red. It's good to see you intend to contribute articles about women, whether real or fictitious. As far as I can see, you have not yet created any women's biographies. You might therefore find it useful to look through our Primer. Please let me know if you run into any difficulties or need assistance. All the best for 2023 and happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 09:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I have created women's biographies at W, started up Ruth Edmonds Hill off head-top, some years ago now, and others, and besides origination, extended women's presence ubiquitously. If you've an interest in library troves, Ruth's other roles and office was in the library of what became the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Studies though Harvard may have further squished that into the HR Insitute now. As the Radcliffe name was tactically retained when the Cliffies' plebiscite preferred a Harvard diploma when finally offerred, mindful of the generations of living Radcliffe alumnae who would respond better to Radcliffe appeals; as their numbers dwindled, H has paired and often supplanted R.
Good to rejoin your movement having given a helping hand in antecedent forays. May estrogen flow ever more broadly in your waking world with mine this year, Ipigott! Pandelver (talk) 10:03, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake. I had in fact seen your new articles from a few years back and actually spent a few minutes updating the List of your creations. Ruth Edmonds Hill, for example, is now C class. It's good to see we can now expect you to write more biographies. You'll see from the WiR talk page that we really need to create many more biographies of women. In this connection, fictional and animated characters also count.--Ipigott (talk) 11:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red January 2023[edit]

Happy New Year from Women in Red | January 2023, Volume 9, Issue 1, Nos 250, 251, 252, 253, 254


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • De-orphan and incorporate an article into Wikipedia using the Find Link tool

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Ipigott (talk) 09:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red in February 2023[edit]

Women in Red Feb 2023, Vol 9, Iss 2, Nos 251, 252, 255, 256, 257, 259


Online events:

Tip of the month:

  • Explore Wikipedia for all variations of the woman's name (birth name,
    married name, re-married name, pen name, nickname)

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red March 2023[edit]

Women in Red Mar 2023, Vol 9, Iss 3, Nos 251, 252, 258, 259, 260, 261


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Mobile phone readers may only see the article "lead" – take some time to make it shine!
    Include something to keep people reading.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red April 2023[edit]

Women in Red Apr 2023, Vol 9, Iss 4, Nos 251, 252, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red May 2023[edit]

Women in Red May 2023, Vol 9, Iss 5, Nos 251, 252, 267, 268, 269, 270


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Use the Google translate app and camera on your phone to translate text from an article or book

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 18:29, 27 April 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red - June 2023[edit]

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 6, Nos 251, 252, 271, 272, 273


Online events:

See also:

Tip of the month:

  • Looking for new red links? Keep an eye out for interesting and notable friends, family, or associates of your last article subject, and re-examine group photos for other women who may still need an article.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 09:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red July 2023[edit]

Women in Red June 2023, Vol 9, Iss 7, Nos 251, 252, 274, 275, 276


Online events:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red 8th Anniversary[edit]

Women in Red 8th Anniversary
In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!

--Lajmmoore (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red August 2023[edit]

Women in Red August 2023, Vol 9, Iss 8, Nos 251, 252, 277, 278, 279, 280


Online events:

See also:

  • Wikimania 2023 will be held in Singapore, 16–19 August, and will be facilitated by the
    affiliates in the ESEAP (East/South East/Asia/Pacific) region.

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

September 2023 at Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red September 2023, Vol 9, Iss 9, Nos 251, 252, 281, 282, 283


Online events:

Tip of the month:

  • The books she wrote might be notable, too; learn 5 quick tips about about book articles.

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red October 2023[edit]

Women in Red October 2023, Vol 9, Iss 10, Nos 251, 252, 284, 285, 286


Online events:

See also

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 10:54, 29 September 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red - November 2023[edit]

Women in Red November 2023, Vol 9, Iss 11, Nos 251, 252, 287, 288, 289


Online events:

See also

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 08:23, 26 October 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red December 2023[edit]

Women in Red December 2023, Vol 9, Iss 12, Nos 251, 252, 290, 291, 292


Online events:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red January 2024[edit]

Women in Red | January 2024, Volume 10, Issue 1, Numbers 291, 293, 294, 295, 296


Online events:

Announcement

  • In 2024 Women in Red also has a one biography a week challenge as part
    of the #1day1woman initiative!

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk) 20:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]

Hello, Pandelver. Thank you for your work on National Native American Hall of Fame. 9H48F, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

While the article is an excellent contribution to Wikipedia, the citations need some work. Currently, citations are grouped at the end, making it unclear what information comes from which source so I've tagged this article as having an unclear citation style.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|9H48F}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

9H48F (talk) 06:18, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red February 2024[edit]

Women in Red | February 2024, Volume 10, Issue 2, Numbers 293, 294, 297, 298


Online events:

Announcement

  • Please let other wikiprojects know about our February Black women event.

Tip of the month:

  • AllAfrica can now be searched on the ProQuest tab at the WP Library.

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red March 2024[edit]

Women in Red | March 2024, Volume 10, Issue 3, Numbers 293, 294, 299, 300, 301


Online events:

Announcements

Tip of the month:

  • When creating a new article, check various spellings, including birth name, married names
    and pseudonyms, to be sure an article doesn't already exist.

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Nomination of List of Five grains in world culture for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Five grains in world culture is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Five grains in world culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 01:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red April 2024[edit]

Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304


Online events:

Announcements

  • The second round of "One biography a week" begins in April as part of #1day1woman.

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Lajmmoore (talk 19:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Women in Red May 2024[edit]

Women in Red | May 2024, Volume 10, Issue 5, Numbers 293, 294, 305, 306, 307


Online events:

Announcements from other communities

Tip of the month:

  • Use open-access references wherever possible, but a paywalled reliable source
    is better than none, particularly for biographies of living people.

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 06:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pandelver&oldid=1221155988"